A suit seeking to challenge the decision of the All Progressives Congress (APC) to adopt indirect primary for nominating its candidate for the forthcoming November 16, 2019 governorship election in Kogi State has been dismissed by the Federal High Court in Abuja.
The judge, Justice Taiwo Taiwo, upheld the preliminary objections filed by the APC to challenge the suit, in ruling that the suit had been caught by the statute of limitation, Punch reports.
He said it was needless to go into the proprietary of the party’s choice of indirect primary since the court lacked the jurisdiction to hear the case on merit having been statute-barred.
He held that the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/883/2019 was a pre-election matter which ought to have been heard and determined within 180 days as provided by section 285(10) of the Nigerian Constitution.
According to the judge, although the suit was filed only on July 18, 2019, it was clearly premised on another one marked FHC/ABJ/CS/833/2019 which instead of being determined within 180 days was only ruled upon on Monday.
He said the Monday’s earlier judgment came over 460 days after the case was filed.
The judge, on the grounds of statute limitation, in the earlier judgment on Monday, dismissed the said foundational suit which was instituted by the Chairman and Secretary of a parallel executive committee of the APC in Kogi State, Haddy Ametuo, and Tam Adejoh, respectively.
The said foundational suit was instituted against the APC, and Abdullahi Bello, who is the Chairman of the Governor Yahaya Bello-backed faction of the party in the state.
The Bello-led faction of the APC in the state is recognised by the national bodies of the party.
The APC which opposed the two suits ruled upon by the court on Monday, was represented by Mr. Paul Daudu.
Delivering judgment on the suit challenging the APC’s adopted mode of primary election in the state, Justice Taiwo held, “I do not intend to waste judicial time on this suit FHC/ABJ/CS/883/2019 in view of the ruling on the suit FHC/ABJ/CS/581/2018 read a few minutes ago, dismissing the suit for being caught by statute of limitation as provided under section 285(10) of the Constitution.”
He ruled that “it will be pointless to consider the proprietary of this suit”, when its foundational suit had been dismissed.